# Florida v. Royer > Supreme Court of the United States · March 23, 1983 · 460 U.S. 491 URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9429118 ## Case - **Full name:** Florida v. Royer - **Court:** Supreme Court of the United States - **Decided:** March 23, 1983 - **Citations:** 460 U.S. 491; 51 U.S.L.W. 4293; 103 S. Ct. 1319; 75 L. Ed. 2d 229; 1983 U.S. LEXIS 151 - **Precedential status:** Published - **Opinion:** Concurrence by Powell - **Judges:** White, Marshall, Powell, Stevens, When, Amendment, What, Moreover, Terry, Probable, Brennan, Blackmun, Rehnquist, Burger, O'Connor - **Cited by:** 5,882 later opinions in the Frix Law Library ## Citator (automated) - No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases. - Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9429118 ## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction) - explaining traffic stop based on reasonable suspicion must be limited in scope and duration because “Fourth Amendment’s prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures has always been interpreted to prevent a search that is not limited to the particularly described ‘pla… - holding that "there are undoubtedly reasons of safety and security that would justify moving a suspect from one location to another during an investigatory detention, such as from an airport concourse to a more private area," but holding in that case that "[t]he record does no… - stating that although detectives' requesting and examining prospective airline passenger's ticket and driver's license were permissible, passenger was effectively "seized" for Fourth-Amendment purposes when detectives identified themselves as narcotics agents, told passenger h… - stating that when a person is approached by the police as part of drug interdiction efforts at an airport, the person “need not answer any question put to him; indeed, he may decline to listen to the questions at all and may go on his way .... [h]e may not be detained even mom… - recognizing that "law enforcement officers do not violate the Fourth Amendment by merely approaching an individual on the street or in another public place, by asking him if he is willing to answer some questions, by putting questions to him if the person is willing to listen,… ## Opinion text Justice Powell, concurring. I join the plurality opinion. This is an airport “stop for questioning” case similar in its general setting to that before us in United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U. S. 544 (1980). 1 The plurality opinion today has discussed helpfully the principles applicable to investigative stops for questioning. Since I was the author of one of the opinions in Mendenhall, id., at 560, I write briefly to repeat that the public has a compelling interest in identifying by all lawful means those who traffic in illicit drugs for personal profit. As the plurality opinion emphasizes, ante, at 506-507, the facts and circumstances of investigative stops necessarily vary. In view of the extent to which air transportation is used in the drug traffic, the fact that the stop at issue is made by trained officers in an airport warrants special consideration. 2 This case, however, differs strikingly from Mendenhall in the circumstances following the lawful initial questioning and the request that the suspect accompany the officers to a more private place. Royer then found himself in a small, windowless room — described as a “large closet” — alone with two officers who, without his consent, already had obtained possession of his checked luggage. In addition, they had retained his driver’s license and airline ticket. Neither the evidence *509 in this case nor common sense suggests that Royer was free to walk away. I agree with the plurality that as a practical matter he then was under arrest, and his surrender of the luggage key to the officers cannot be viewed as consensual. As the plurality notes, ante, at 504, n. 9, five Justices in Mendenhall were of the view that the respondent in that case had not been illegally detained, and therefore that she had consented to be searched. Since 1974 the Drug Enforcement Administration has assigned highly skilled agents to the major airports as part of a nationwide program to intercept drug couriers. These agents are guided in part by a “drug courier profile” that identifies characteristics that experience has shown to be relevant in identifying suspects. See Mendenhall, 446 U. S., at 562 . --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9429118. Public record. Not legal advice.